Truly So Divided? (or) WATCH ME YELL!

[the captain]

In the U.S. at least (which is all I can even fake being knowledgeable about), political discussion strikes me as little more than ever-louder name-calling, generalizing, and demonizing (if possible without using any specifics, ever, or acknowledging any nuance, ever). It makes me sad. Do you think the world is truly as black/white (red/blue?) as the media yellers yell? Do you really think the other side (from you) is malevolent? Do you find it easy to yell-debate? If so, do you do it for fun? In the hope of somehow converting 40-whatever percent of the population? Of getting back-slaps from your team? I understand and enjoy disagreement and debate, but I wonder if the way we devolve when discussing political matters reflects particularly well on our species. For the record, if possible, this isn't intended to be a thread about politics, so much as about how people view and discuss politics. We'll see if that's possible (or remotely interesting to anyone else).

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

I generally view people with distrust and mild disdain... I think those who blindly support any political party without thinking about why they do so (much like religion, when some  people worship their chosen deity because they are told to do so, or by peer pressure, rather than because of their true beliefs)...I think those people are a sign that the gene pool needs some additional chlorine.

And now that I've likely pissed off a good majority of the board, I'll hit post, get up, and drink my Jones Soda and eat my organic vegetable chips.

Yay me.

[the captain]

I can't imagine that post offending anyone, in that all it did was imply people ought to consider their thoughts. I think most people would say they do not blindly accept their political beliefs. What I do find interesting is how often those people--and I mean across the political spectrum, with me able to cite examples from my far-right wing family to some far-left friends and everyone between them--seem to demonstrate otherwise. You know "I'm too smart to fall for that kind of thing ... but THOSE PEOPLE just [xyz]..." (For the record, lest anyone take it wrong, it's my most liberal friend of all whom I blame most of that last quoted demonstration, as if liberals were thoughtful, considered, measured, skeptical, but conservatives were either evil or stupid, and possibly both. This is not my belief.)

[Jason]

This post is probably going to look like I wrote it for Stormfront, but it's not the case.

The Jewnited Strokes of Americunts. Encyclopedia Dramatica and George Carlin got that right.

As an American, I see, in the flesh, the stereotypes that the "rest of the world" collectively love to launch at Americans on a daily basis. Stupidity, gross ignorance, total lack of regard, total lack of common decency, and general arrogance. This is by no means representative of the whole American populace, but it's a growing plurality of the population. And it's not like said American plurality is alone with these traits; you'll find people like that all over the world. Except for the arrogance issue.

People, in my opinion, fit into two categories - citizens of a nation and citizens of the world. Now of course, that may sound like a ludicrous concept, since obviously we're all on the same planet. But the difference between citizens of a nation and citizens of the world is that citizens of the world are, in my opinion, less prone to exhibit the tendencies stated in my piece about "stereotypes". Citizens of the world are endowed with the intelligence to know that their geographic location, religion, race, political leanings, ideas, and economic status do not make them any more or less valuable than anyone else in the world. Citizens of the world can be found everywhere on the planet. It's just that I firmly believe that the smallest concentration of citizens of the world can be found in the United States. Those in the United States who are not citizens of the world are a serious problem. Ignorance may be bliss, but don't bad-mouth the rest of the world because they're calling you out for your bullshit.

As far as politics are concerned, the Obama/McCain election was a cause of great hilarity to me. We had a total display of race vs. gender in this election. If you voted McCain, "you're a racist" and if you voted Obama,"you're sexist". And it became plainly obvious that a lot of people voted for Obama because of his race just like a lot of people voted for McCain due to his running mate's gender.

Some friends and I conducted a little experiment when we were in Philadelphia around election time. We asked a group of black individuals what they thought of Obama's policies. We each took turns reeling off a policy. "We love it, man, we love it! We'll DO IT!" What they didn't know, however, was that my friends and I were naming McCain's policies. Of course, that said it right there. We snickered as we walked away from them, confident that a good majority of the black population in the United States couldn't give a f*** about what Obama's policies are. As long as "one of them" was in office, they couldn't be happier. I am by no means overly prejudiced against any race or religion, but when said races or religions try to live up to the stereotypes thrust upon them by their persecutors, then there's a problem. We're talking whites, blacks, Asians, Latinos, Middle Easterners, Christians, Jews, Muslims, Ericclaptonites, Brianwilsonians...every one of them. And that to me is a sad state of affairs. No one, by virtue of their race or religion, is inherently inferior or superior to any other race no matter how much Josef Mengele might have tried to convince people. The common perception in the United States is that whites are all great, everyone else just makes the streets unsafe. I'm sorry to say it for all you religious right and hard-right conservatives out there, but a person's race does not predetermine their urge to commit crimes. That, friends, is the failures of a pyramid capitalist structure in a democratic republic. And it doesn't just extend to so-called "minorities". Whites are just as prone to that kind of sh*t. I'm not saying crime is the answer for the less fortunate of American society, but like all forbidden fruit, it tastes good when you have a bite.

I guess what I'm trying to get at is this. We're not perfect. Let's all get together, love each other, have a good shag, smoke a cigarette after the fun is over, and make the best out of this ball of confusion we happen to share. Nations divide people; not race or religion.

[the captain]

Nice.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

Very well put.

[SloopJohnB]

Very well put indeed. Pretty much sums up my opinion.

[the captain]

So do you all (all three of you!) think that the divisive tenor of debate is effective? (You'd almost have to believe it is, in that it continues or increases. If behavior is Darwinian...) If effective, in what way: it wins elections for the [either] party, or that it gets things done? My thinking is that it's a good way to win an election: for better or (in my opinion) worse, people like a hard-liner who won't compromise; the further you can be from compromise, then, the stronger message. But isn't that concept offensive to the general population? Are we really so stupid as to fall for what is obviously just an election strategy (and grow a baseless hatred for "the other" in the process)? I'm too old to hope the answer is no, I guess.

[grillo]

Politics is about dividing people up ; left/right, black/white, gay/straight, etc.
Tends to keep folks from paying attention to the big picture; economic ruin, endless war, police-state.
Mostly people seem uninformed about anything other than sports and weird celebrity trivia, something I believe is neither accidental nor innocently accomplished.
No need to go into 'conspiracy theories' to point out the political class loves to use/create disasters (oil spill, war with Iran, drug war, Korean peninsula, 'health care', 'climate change', ad infinitum) in order to further whatever agenda they have in mind (usually stealing wealth and supressing human rights), a tactic known as the Hegelian dialectic or problem, reaction, solution. That's pretty much all politics has to offer.
To me, voting is the sleight-of-hand that makes the State appear legitimate. Their legitimacy rests solely on their ability to say "The people have spoken." Why give them power? I possess greater intellect than to believe anything so preposterous as the notion that anyone else has the right to run my life or manage my property without my explicit consent – consent I refuse to give by voting.
 Oh, I could go on and on, but you get the picture

[the captain]

Would you propose an absence of government, then? Or purely localized government (which would of course have less money involved and is easier to keep tabs on)? For those of us in developed countries, lack of government would also mean lack of quite a few services we take for granted. Water, roads, trash collection, police, and such. So while on some levels I like a good anti-government rant as much as the next guy, I can't imagine such a thing as reasonable.

[the captain]

An relevant coincidence: while reading a collection of essays on a different subject, I came across this just now:

We have inherited these useful tools [of seeking a higher power to offer strength or comfort when confronted with mortal danger]. No one today can deny that faith ... comforts billions of people aware of their own mortality. Similarly, the ability to divide the world into "Us" and "Them" and then dehumanize "Them" would have been useful to roaming bands of hunter-gatherers. These same tendencies have been repeatedly reported in chimpanzees. They are all too often apparent in human conflicts.

- Leonard Susskind, "The Good Fight"

[Alex]

Nations divide people; not race or religion.

Yes! World citizenship, baby!

[the captain]

I think any distinguishing feature divides people when the people of one of those features is threatened or sees benefit to exploiting it.

[grillo]

Would you propose an absence of government, then? Or purely localized government (which would of course have less money involved and is easier to keep tabs on)? For those of us in developed countries, lack of government would also mean lack of quite a few services we take for granted. Water, roads, trash collection, police, and such. So while on some levels I like a good anti-government rant as much as the next guy, I can't imagine such a thing as reasonable.

I don't consider anything that is imposed on me a service. And the roads...always with the roads. The first roads in the US were private roads. Now we have a government imposed monopoly where the state takes your money (by threat of force) and may or may not use it for these so called services. Same with police, or firefighters or anything. Just because the state says they are the only ones who can possibly provide these services doesn't make that a fact. But, in case you really want to look into the ideas I (and many others) think are the only logical way of looking at government, may I direct you to the following link... http://www.strike-the-root.com/91/allport/allport6.html
Hopefully some of your very understandable and common questions can be answered.
I gotta go back to work (so I can pay the tax man 1/3rd of my earnings with the promise of many more amazing 'services' that, if I don't pay for them, will get me thrown in jail or killed if I were to resist! yay.)
Keep an open mind, and good luck!

[the captain]

My mind is always open. As for roads (and anything else I mentioned or failed to mention), I didn't imply there weren't ever, aren't now, and can't ever be alternatives. I'll go to your link and read.

[the captain]

I read the essay your direct link led to, as well as the "About." Because this thread was intended to avoid specific political beliefs and focus on how or why people get to those beliefs, I won't go further than to say I don't agree. That said, I agree with a small part of its aim, "de-mystifying government." I don't see that happening at that site, though; quite the opposite.

[grillo]

I read the essay your direct link led to, as well as the "About." Because this thread was intended to avoid specific political beliefs and focus on how or why people get to those beliefs, I won't go further than to say I don't agree. That said, I agree with a small part of its aim, "de-mystifying government." I don't see that happening at that site, though; quite the opposite.

Well, in that case, I'd say twelve years of forced government schooling might be a good place to start looking for why people believe ANYthing about the government. Government schooling is essentially twelve long years of child abuse; it is a scheme designed to turn healthy, inquisitive, confident, free-minded children into pliant corporate drones, mindless consumers, and diminished, servile citizens who know their place: under the thumb of the state.
 I'm happy you checked out the link. Also, I see what you mean about sites like that not 'de-mystifying' the state, but it has a point of view that seems consistent morally, which is more than I can say for war-mongering sites like CNN of Fox. If you want more info on how public schooling molds (in both senses) our minds check out http://www.schoolsucksproject.com/. It's done by an ex-public school teacher and may be a little better at that whole de-mysitfying thing.
Sorry 'bout always pointing to links, but it seems faster than me rambling, and you can easily skip it if you think it blows.
Good topic though, even if I have a hard time staying on it.

[the captain]

grillo, I think I'd like to sit down with you, have a few (dozen for me) drinks, and discuss exactly how you'd propose to implement and maintain your ideas of a functioning society. But not in this thread.

[grillo]

grillo, I think I'd like to sit down with you, have a few (dozen for me) drinks, and discuss exactly how you'd propose to implement and maintain your ideas of a functioning society. But not in this thread.

Sounds good. I also have this fixation with the Beach Boys for the last twenty-five years that we could discuss...

[the captain]

I kinda like that group, myself.

[Mike's Beard]

.

[Mike's Beard]

.

[Mike's Beard]

I feel that Government and Political Leaders are a necessary evil. Yes the majority of them are buttholes and only the most brainwashed can fail to notice their prime objective is to look after themselves and their fellow elite. They have become the masters of keeping the masses just complacent enough and in awe/fear of them so they don't revolt, but can anyone here seriously picture a feasible alternative? Government provides the means to maintain law and order within a developed society. Without that there would be anarchy in the streets within hours. I feel VERY few people in this world live a good honest life 100% because they have a good strong moral fabric. Let's face it without the deterrant of fines, imprisonment and in extreme cases death how many of us would NEVER commit crimes?

As for questioning the services our Governments provide:  Food, shelter,roads,medicine,sanitation,energy/fuel resources and Police Protection are things we have come to take for granted from our Governments. Without them we be up shitcreek very quickly. Grillo makes the point that these 'services' can be handled by anybody not just exclusively through the state but without a Government to regulate them and make them accountable we would be at their mercy.

Just in case this post looks like it's becoming a love letter to the Powers that Be, let me stress I never vote. Never have, I doubt I ever will. Doesn't matter who you vote for the BIG PICTURE is always going to remain the same.  Americans you may think you get stepped on the worst well try being a Brit!! England is still chained by Aristocratic class devisions dating back 100's of years. Nearly all of our MP's come from this High Society background.(A quick sidenote- in the States it's much different,as anyone with enough cash can bankroll his/her way into the political arena. That's what made me laugh about Obama. Senators don't care squat about skin colour these days, I doubt they have for 30 odd years. The only colour they see is green- as in the number of Greenbacks in your wallet of which Obama has many. All a black President shows is that rich politicans now come in more than one variety of colour!) As a result of this our politicians here haven't a clue what the average working class guy thinks.  At the same time we must get things into perspective and be thankfull that we are not under the rule of some third world Dictatorship. Those are the ones that really get it bad. In some countires much of what has been stated in this thread would get you a bullet in the head. At least we have the right to free speech. It's just a shame no one who really matters is listening.  If I can meet the Tim Robbins and Bonos of the world halfway, it's in that I too believe its the Leaders of The Free World are the ones who really have the power and means to sort out the planets problems if they really wanted to.

I hope this post hasn't been too rambling or unfocused. No doubt Luther will take great delight in pointing out the flaws in my above points.

[the captain]

I hope this post hasn't been too rambling or unfocused. No doubt Luther will take great delight in pointing out the flaws in my above points.

Not at all: I'm not looking to argue in this thread, actually, and I appreciate your views. (Arguments about politics and religion are tremendously fun for me, but only when I either know my friendship with the other person can take it, or when I don't give a f*** about the other person and have no qualms really truly offending them on a deep level, as those topics can do. I don't feel I'm in either situation on a message board. Plus the opportunity for misunderstanding on a message board is just too great.) Now I will ask you to comment: how is it that the people so quickly and completely follow segments of that "necessary evil" of "buttholes"? Or--what I think they are doing more than building followers--to so quickly and completely despise some other segment? Do you think it's a particular set of weaknesses or vulnerabilities they prey on intentionally? Or that the populace is just especially stupid and needs heroes and villains? (  ) Or what?

[Mike's Beard]

In answer to your last question Luther -

To paraphrase Al Pacino in Scarface many Americans (and others but particularly them) need someone to point to and say "That's them! There's the bad guy!"  Those with the most have the most to lose and I feel that's why so many Yanks are fearfull of others. Politicians in USA have become experts at using this to their own advantage. Time and time again they will hold up a picture of "The Foreign Bogeyman" and say "This person wants to threaten you and your way of life". A good example would be the Iraq war. How else could they get away with bombing the crap out of a country just to steal it's oil reserves? The war on Iraq was the biggest masterstroke of modern times in that the USA went in there blatantly for one reason and one reason alone in front of the entire world and managed to justify itself to its countrymen by saying they were preventing another 9/11.

Why did so many Americans swallow this lie?

Bush was able to twist the American public's still fresh post 9/11 shellshock together with their inability and ignorance to distinguish between the separate countries of Iraq,Afghanistan, Iran, Egypt etc... and their differing religious/political agendas. He achieved this mostly through the Media's increasing right wing stranglehold.

I could ramble on but its easier just to say people will agree to just about anything if they can be convinced its for their own protection and yes at least 1/4 of the world population is just plain stoopid.